Books

My quibble with you, is this belief in reporting the truth. That is a modern falsehood of post WWII journalism. Journalism has always been propaganda of the owners and most importantly the advertisers who foot the bill in most cases. The newspapers of olden days of 100 years ago didn't even make believe they reported the truth. It was assumed it was just one point of view. Why most cities had many papers from far left to far right and in between. Something for everyone. Today, nobody who wants variety reads USA Today or Wall St. Journal, they surf the net and get their point of view validated. Like the good old days. Regards, Tony T. [Points well taken Tony. Still, the ethical tenets of the profession apply, reporting still differs from editorial content (or should) and belongs in its place, bias still merits noting, self-evident errors and internal contradictions drive me nuts and demean the profession. What would you have The Uninvited Ombudsman do?]

::::::::

(Referring to the ludicrous nature of phony gun-free zones)Amen to that! I've worked in hospitals for over thirty years, all of which have had these absurd signs posted. Yet in addition to secret announcement codes for arrests, fire, etc. there is always a code for a “weapons situation.” Why is such a code needed if signs are posted? What garbage! If Mr. Nutcase pays a visit (the staff entrance is around the corner from my office) I just have to hope I can lay my hands on a bottle of stain or something else to use as a weapon before he finds me… while I don't miss the smog, the crime, the traffic, one thing I do miss about living in Arizona is visiting your booth at Crossroads and saying hello. I'd buy everything in your library if it was in the budget…Michael, Laboratory Safety Officer

::::::::

Enjoyed the entire Page Nine, as usual. Thanks for your hard work. Your skill at getting the point over is certainly a blessing, and I know that, agnostic or not, you don't believe that you are responsible for how adept you've become at confrontationally addressing all who continue their attempt (with much $ and media sensationalism) to take away our basic rights. So, God bless you and your family!I especially appreciated the NYT write up. It's about time you got deserving publicity. I mean, what's a liberal mind going to do to say after learning about Alan Korwin, except, maybe, "Profanity, profanity, why can't MY brilliance get that kind of coverage. Profanity."So, keep up the good work (continue writing), and continue making our stand for freedom beyond dispute.And, finally, as millions will agree, the "Alan Korwin Experience " is the highlight of Armed American Radio. Sincerely, Mike G. [I asked Mike about the New York Times reference, haven't been in there for a while, he meant New Times, http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/gunslinger-alan-korwin-has-made-a-career-pushing-unbridled-gun-rights-but-critics-say-he-doesnt-shoot-straight-7363406. The article has a nice handful of errors, but overall it's pretty good.

::::::::

I have to say my earlier note was an emotional one and I haven't been doing the best job of taking gun violence in stride. I have no idea what the solution is to gun violence, but America continues to lead the industrial West when it comes to shooting it out. I think one step in the right direction would be an extension of the castle doctrine to allow shooting anyone open carrying an assault rifle. [emphasis mine. Alan.] That would be an interesting court test.

If you see a couple of people carrying assault rifles openly, you could argue convincingly that they needed killing. This is based on experience with people openly carrying assault rifles in public places who were perfectly within their rights until they pulled the trigger.

Actually, I think this would be very appealing to folks like you. It would be taking us back to something more like the Old West which is the keystone of our shoot first and ask questions later culture.

By the way, of all the people I have asked why they carry concealed weapons, they all reply it's for protection. When I ask the same people if they wear bulletproof vests, the answer is zero.

ps if you are concerned about protection, why would you not make a bulletproof vest your first choice? Like police officers? A bulletproof vest will have fought off the first attack, giving you time to reach for your own Glock. -Bill S.

"Sebulex" writes: "I'm a liberal and I have a gun and I would bet my mother's life that Obama's mysterious troops aren't going to show up at my door to confiscate it, and unlike you I don't have sexual feelings for my gun. You people are just old fashioned pussies. What aren't you afraid of? And how on earth did I get on your poisonous email list?"

Dear "Sebulex,"

Thanks for writing, and saying you're a liberal. I've heard things about liberals, but I prefer to discount them. You've made that hard to do in your case.

1. Please don't bet your mother's life on anything. 2. What "Obama's mysterious troops" are you talking about? I've said nothing in that regard. 3. I haven't suggested anyone is going to show up at your door, or any doors. 4. I haven't said you have sexual feelings about your gun, and be careful about what you deny. 5. Why do you conjecture the same about me? It's not in my writings. 6. That's just your first sentence to me.

Your next sentence addresses some imaginary "you people" so I'll leave that for them to answer. If you'd like to write about what I've written in my report (Page Nine No. 135), please do. I have no idea how you got on my list, no need to call names, maybe you signed up and forgot, or wrote to me about something, or someone else did it when you weren't looking (our system theoretically prevents that, but you know how computers are, fallible). If you'd like to comment on the actual content of my report, I'd enjoy hearing from you. Alan. http://www.gunlaws.com/Page9Folder100up/PageNine-135.htm

P.S. I looked up "Sebulex." Medicated dandruff shampoo? Am I supposed to take some meaning from that? [No response received.]

////////

Alan, Almost all of school shootings have been by persons on mind-altering drugs. Why not mandate that anyone prescribed certain psychiatric medications be prohibited from access to firearms? The problem is not firearms, it is drugs. --Frank L.

[The drug/homicidal-rage link can't be denied, it is virtually universal, though the medical field adamantly denies it and the media downplays it as hard as they can. But deny civil rights to tens of millions of innocent people who haven't done anything because they take medicine? I can't support that, and neither should you. There is also a logical fallacy in that line of thinking, because coincidence is not causality, e.g., every drug addict in prison started on milk. A.]

Regarding your open letter to Obama, why do you deal with these people as though they were interested at all in a compromise, or your reason, your arguments, or even your rights? They prove every moment that they have no concern for any of those things.

It should be abundantly clear to someone with your degree of involvement with firearms that what the "Gun Control" industry is after has absolutely no connection to the things they mouth in public. The only reason they have largely dropped the rhetoric of rank demonization in favor of rank deceptions like "Common Sense" laws, or "reasonable" anything, is to get the nose of the confiscation camel under the tent flap. They know nobody supports their real goal, which is a monopoly of physical force by those who share their affinities -- and so they seek to gull and browbeat with words like "reasonable," and reams of data showing their constituents' preferences for whatever insanity they advocate.

Arguing in good faith with these people is going wind up one way -- the same way every argument with a tyrant intent on securing untrammeled power ends. With us lined up against a wall, or on the edge of a ditch. Giving them any quarter whatsoever begets nothing but relentless demands for ever more. As an exercise, ask any one of these people to tell you exactly when they will have enough -- will it be single-shot muzzle-loading Derringers for the commoners? Or will it be nothing -- as they will not rest so long as one single gun remains in private hands?

I think you know the result of that little thought experiment. It's the same as the one where you ask them at what level of taxation will they say "enough," or how much anyone should be "allowed" to earn. No answer, because they know no satiety. They don't seek safety, accommodation, or anything else they prattle about.

They seek Utopia. And pretending they do not only aids in the deception. I urge you to reconsider the efficacy of any conciliatory approach to the statists and their demands. They have long since declared war on us, and it's time we behaved as though we realize that -- by dropping the collegial airs, and being as implacable and relentless as they are -- only in favor of liberty and not against it.

Sincerely, D.W.

[Your points are all well taken and beautifully expressed. Many other said similar things (though not as well). But perhaps you're missing the point. First, it's just a writing technique, I don't really expect the guy to read the letter, c'mon, he doesn't even read his daily security briefings.

It's aimed at the millions of people swarming around him, people who read newspapers and are on staffs, it's aimed at the court of popular opinion, to force (carefully nudge, actually) people to think about what they're doing, and win the battle for our gun rights, one step at a time. People in the media, people who are politically connected at every level, our own choir, not just the guy in the address box, that's my audience.

Sometimes you need a bludgeon, sometimes you need a soft drink. From the looks of it, it's having an effect. One of many, it's a long struggle. I've got more coming. You should send this one around, especially to non gunnies, like democrats, rattle their cages a little. Add this: How can you not support education?

As far as the guy who did release a phony birth certificate, and all the other stuff going on, I've got some other irons in the fire too, ya know. Look at some of the blue notes on the left:http://www.gunlaws.com

I strongly suggest you unsubscribe me. Immediately. I did not sign up for this and couldn't even possibly disagree with you more. I am not your ally in any way, and do not wish to receive your messages.

[My sincerest apologies, I didn't mean to upset you. I've never had anyone express such a closed attitude. If you don't agree with education, what do you suppose might work? I've unsubscribed you of course.]

////////

Please please no more,No more of this.Mlk

[Are you asking to unsubscribe,or are you asking for an end to the awful thingsthe government and others are up to,like demanding no voter ID, but ID for everything else]

Who sent this, as I am a Canadian and out of five countries lived in this is the only one armed.I do not feel that I belong in a country armed by citizens against a govt voted in to serve.

[Hey if you don't feel like you belong here, why are you here?I'd really like to know.Foreigners are often complaining, but live here anyway.Is that you? Always strikes us citizens as hypocritical, no?You like all the good stuff an armed nation provides,but have no end to the vacuous complaints.If you read Page Nine, you'll learn about all this,it will make you a better person, and part time resident.What would you like me to do?[No reply received.]

////////

Someone forwarded me your letter to President Obama. I have no problem with having a gun for security reasons in a home, for hunting and shooting. The many shootings in this country are horrendous. I am not a gun owner. What are your thoughts on banning the sale of assault weapons? Why are those legally sold in this country? I see no purpose in anyone owning an assault weapon unless they are in the armed forces. I posted this on FB and naturally got a backlash from a friend who is a gun owner. To be honest, I never heard of you but when I googled you, your bio was impressive, to say the least. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on the above question.

[Regina, Assault is a kind of behavior, it is not a kind of hardware. The media has created this term to scare people and muddle the debate. When you say "assault weapon," to what are you actually referring? Diane Feinstein' s so-called "assault-weapon" bill would have banned anything with a grip. Hard to believe right? It's no wonder everyone objected and it went no where. So what is it you're really objecting to? I'd like to hear your reply.

I hope my brief remarks have helped clarify your thoughts. It sounds like you, unfortunately, are a victim of the awful reporting that has confused so many people following the "news" media. They rant about "ugly" guns, or what they think of as "dangerous" guns, without pointing out that all guns are dangerous, they're supposed to be dangerous, and wouldn't be much good if they weren't dangerous. If you're referring to the AR-15 rifle, that's what police use, because it's accurate, reliable, it's the best, which is why the public likes it too. Using something inferior when your life might depend on it is a really bad idea.]

////////

Hi Alan,

Forgotten me already? I'm the guy that wrote How to Win a Gunfight, and we've met many times when we were living in Scottsdale. Now, we're living in an 18th century house overlooking the North Sea in Scarborough, in gentle retirement. Since we left AZ in November 2011, we've visited New York , Berlin, Prague, Rome, Florence (Italy, not Ariz.) and Siena, and we go down to London about four times a year.

Have to admit that I do miss my guns; not so much as shooting them, but knowing that I can own them. That's why I signed up for your Page Nine newsletter -- to keep me in touch with a free society.

Incidentally, according to a friend of mine in London, if I wanted to buy an illegal handgun, it would take "no more than a couple of hours," if you knew the right people.

The politicians here tell us that street crime is down, but as Winston Churchill said; "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics," and I think we're getting some heavily-massaged statistics thrown at us. If you want to read what right-minded people think over here, I'd suggest that you read the Daily Mail online at http://www.dailymail.co.uk. The lefties and commentariat all sneer, but it is the biggest-selling conservative newspaper in the UK. Take a look. All the best, Tony Walker.

[Tony's book remains a good seller and a fine examination of the split-second timing that can determine the winner in a spontaneous gunfight. We have them in stock, only $14.95, click the link to read about it. Alan.]

About the Author

Freelance writer Alan Korwin is a founder and past president of the Arizona Book Publishing Association. With his wife Cheryl he operates Bloomfield Press, the largest producer and distributor of gun-law books in the country. Here writing as "The Uninvited Ombudsman," Alan covers the day's stories as they ought to read. Read more.